2020 Chicago Cubs Offseason Thread

[Stevemil505]

Did you seriously just tell me to "grow up"? First off, how incredibly uncalled for, as I did nothing that would require "growing up". I've got quite legitimate reasons (as outlined in another post) for disliking Tom Ricketts. So if you'd like to explain what about that would be cause for me to need to mature and "grow up" I'd love to know.

Why would I "hate" Wrigley? I'm 33 years old. I don't really care what Wrigley did with the Cubs. And you're right, the Tribune Co was not a good owner either. But just because those two were bummer owners, and Rickett's hired Epstein a decade ago, doesn't mean he just gets to be a cheap bastard and gets a pass for it. Rickett's didn't "bring" a WS here. He took zero PA's, he threw 0 innings, he made zero trades. There are years the Cubs spent around the amount of money you'd expect a large budget to spend, but he's walked that back real quickly, and has found almost any excuse to do so. He's hid behind the luxury tax (which is not nearly as large of a penalty as franchises make it out to be; it's a self-imposed line they themselves created, not for competitive balance but to line their own pockets. He's not hiding from his losses, as he's sung those loud and proud). Rickett's might not be the worst offender of all, but it doesn't mean he's been good, either. It'd be like sitting in a room full of convicted, confessed serial killers. Sure, one of the 30 may have donated 10% of what he stole after he killed folks, but he still was a serial killer. Being not as awful does not equate to something that should be celebrated. Ricketts did some not-awful things. He's also hamstrung the Cubs and is actively doing just that, while our ticket prices have gone up, our cable bills have gone up; he gets tax breaks and refuses to put it back into the team, or limits spending enough to where the Cubs consider non-tendering good players.

So let's ask ourselves this? What sounds more mature; finding faults in ownership or blindly accepting their cheap attitude because he was the owner when the Cubs won the WS? Because, maybe it isn't I who needs to "grow up" but the person who's blindly following authority who could use a little more sophistication and cultivated opinions on ownership. Just a suggestion.

You want to know why I suggested you grow up. Ok.You sound just like the spoiled son of the rich man in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". "Whaa! Buy it for me, Daddy" You promised me it, Daddy! If you love me, you'd buy it for me, Daddy! Whaa!Whaa! "
Your chronological age may be 33, but you sound just like that 8 year-old brat in the movie with your "Buy it for me" attitude.
And you can find fault in someone without hating them--at least a grown-up can.

[1908_Cubs]

You want to know why I suggested you grow up. Ok.You sound just like the spoiled son of the rich man in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". "Whaa! Buy it for me, Daddy" You promised me it, Daddy! If you love me, you'd buy it for me, Daddy! Whaa!Whaa! "
Your chronological age may be 33, but you sound just like that 8 year-old brat in the movie with your "Buy it for me" attitude.
And you can find fault in someone without hating them--at least a grown-up can.

Well, first off, there wasn't a "son of the rich man" in that movie, it was Veruca, and she was a woman. Check your sources, because you really lose a lot of steam if your can't even get your mocking done correctly. If you'd like to insult me, start with getting those correct, then working outwards.

Secondly, Id recommend re-reading my post, because at no point do I sound ungrateful, you are just caught in a corner and lashing out, trying to save face. I outlined my argument quite clearly.

I both acknowledge that Ricketts was the owner during the 2016 season, that being better than the Tribune company is a low bar to clear, and that the issue is larger; and with owners across the sport.

If you would like to contribute to the conversation, please do so. But actually contribute. What about my statements were incorrect? Ricketts continues to raise prices while decreasing his spending. He could easily spend more. Ownership created the luxury tax and owners league wide are hiding behind it. Ricketts paid for the renovation with fans funds but won't place tax savings back into anything but his pocket.

Here's a better question; what is Tom Ricketts doing that the Tribune didn't? Because while Tom owned the 2016 team, he hasn't been spending drastically different than the Cubs did, especially in the later 00s. And remember; Tom just opened the books. Had Epstein been in charged in 2007-2008 perhaps the Cubs win a WS under the Tribune. Then what? The difference wasn't the spending at that point, its the brain trust. Much of the difference has been Hendry vs Epstein, not Tribune vs Ricketts. So Ricketts should get some credit, but if we are doling it out for 2016, its not that large a sliver.

Lastly, I never said I hated Tom Ricketts as a person. So get off your high horse and go back and read. I hate Tom Ricketts as an owner. It's right in the post you quoted clear as day. As in, his entity as owner, not his soul. Save the self righteousness. Its especially rich in a post that is literally just one big insult.

Listen, if you think thats all okay, then frankly, you're allowing owners of teams to siphon off money from the players and the fans to line their loaded pockets. Have at it. But you're on the wrong team if you think owners give a **** about you, or the team. So you can keep defending them, and they'll continue to trash your favorite teams. They'll continue to pay lower amounts of the team's profits to the players you actually like watching. No one watches Tom Ricketts eat a hot dog. We watch Baez to steal home, and Bryant to hit home runs. Those are the guys I want to have my money. Not Tom Ricketts.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

[CP_414]

I'm not trying to defend or praise Rickett from not spending more, but it hard to totally trash him based on 2020 and an uncertainty yet of how 2021 or 22 going to go.

For me, yes he on a short lease with me but im gonna wait and see exactly what they do this offseason and next before I decide if he a garbage owner or not..
I've been through the whole Tribune ERA, now they were garbage owners that profited off of Carey,WGN, and the 84 team and never considered putting anything extra into the team itself

I dont think TR will be as bad as the Tribune or as good as George Steinbrenner with spending, but we'll see how things look come next offseason

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

None of what I said was based on 2020. I also don’t share your uncertainty about the direction this is heading in 21 and 22 and maybe beyond.

The last 10 years of Tribune payrolls was pretty comparable to the 1st 10 years of Ricketts payrolls relative to the rest of the league. Relative to a percentage of revenues the last 10 years of Tribune payrolls were considerably higher than the 1st 10 years of Ricketts payrolls.

In terms of player spending, the Ricketts are a lot closer to the Tribune years than you think.

[Stevemil505]

[Stevemil505]

I'm not trying to defend or praise Rickett from not spending more, but it hard to totally trash him based on 2020 and an uncertainty yet of how 2021 or 22 going to go.

For me, yes he on a short lease with me but im gonna wait and see exactly what they do this offseason and next before I decide if he a garbage owner or not..
I've been through the whole Tribune ERA, now they were garbage owners that profited off of Carey,WGN, and the 84 team and never considered putting anything extra into the team itself

I dont think TR will be as bad as the Tribune or as good as George Steinbrenner with spending, but we'll see how things look come next offseason

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

Agree with you 100%!

[Stevemil505]

Well, first off, there wasn't a "son of the rich man" in that movie, it was Veruca, and she was a woman. Check your sources, because you really lose a lot of steam if your can't even get your mocking done correctly. If you'd like to insult me, start with getting those correct, then working outwards.

Secondly, Id recommend re-reading my post, because at no point do I sound ungrateful, you are just caught in a corner and lashing out, trying to save face. I outlined my argument quite clearly.

I both acknowledge that Ricketts was the owner during the 2016 season, that being better than the Tribune company is a low bar to clear, and that the issue is larger; and with owners across the sport.

If you would like to contribute to the conversation, please do so. But actually contribute. What about my statements were incorrect? Ricketts continues to raise prices while decreasing his spending. He could easily spend more. Ownership created the luxury tax and owners league wide are hiding behind it. Ricketts paid for the renovation with fans funds but won't place tax savings back into anything but his pocket.

Here's a better question; what is Tom Ricketts doing that the Tribune didn't? Because while Tom owned the 2016 team, he hasn't been spending drastically different than the Cubs did, especially in the later 00s. And remember; Tom just opened the books. Had Epstein been in charged in 2007-2008 perhaps the Cubs win a WS under the Tribune. Then what? The difference wasn't the spending at that point, its the brain trust. Much of the difference has been Hendry vs Epstein, not Tribune vs Ricketts. So Ricketts should get some credit, but if we are doling it out for 2016, its not that large a sliver.

Lastly, I never said I hated Tom Ricketts as a person. So get off your high horse and go back and read. I hate Tom Ricketts as an owner. It's right in the post you quoted clear as day. As in, his entity as owner, not his soul. Save the self righteousness. Its especially rich in a post that is literally just one big insult.

Listen, if you think thats all okay, then frankly, you're allowing owners of teams to siphon off money from the players and the fans to line their loaded pockets. Have at it. But you're on the wrong team if you think owners give a **** about you, or the team. So you can keep defending them, and they'll continue to trash your favorite teams. They'll continue to pay lower amounts of the team's profits to the players you actually like watching. No one watches Tom Ricketts eat a hot dog. We watch Baez to steal home, and Bryant to hit home runs. Those are the guys I want to have my money. Not Tom Ricketts.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

As to my use of Willy Wonka, there's been (at least) two versions of it, those being with Gene Wilder and another with Johnny Depp. Both have been on tv this month and my wife has watched both. I'm not sure which version my quote was from, but I do know I saw/heard it; about 5 minutes of listening to the brat was all I could take. Same with you.(Not that you are a brat, but you are a whiner. I shall therefore choose to ignore your further posts. (I'm 74 and a Cubs fan since 1952.) I choose to no longer listen to whiners any more.)

[1908_Cubs]

As to myusw of Willy Wonka, there's been (at least) two versions of it, those being with Gene Wilder and anorher with Johnny Depp. Both havebeen on tv this month and my wife has watched both. I'm not sure which version my quote was from, both I do know I saw/heard it; about 5 minutes of listening to the brat eas all I could take. Same with you. I shall therefore cooose to ignore yourfurther posts. (I'm 74 and a Cubs fan since 1952. I choose to no longer listen to whiners any longer.)

It was Veruca Salt in both movies. It doesn't matter which version you watched. Again, if you want be someone who feels its okay to get on the internet and then immediately mock folks, it makes it look even worse if you can't get your mockery correct. And yeah, I'm being nit picky, but if you would like to hurl insults, I won't play that game, but will instead needlessly find fault in your insults.

Moving forward, ignore what you choose. Your choice. I cannot make you read anything I write, and so be it. But its fairly clear you want to run away with your tail between your legs because you don't have anything to add. You can't even acknowledge you didn't read my original post correctly after getting self righteousness about hating people (again, never said that).

I would also hault my self righteousness. You have plenty of posts throughout your history in which you have complained about players. Are you also a brat? Because it seems by your definition that if you find fault and complain about the way someone else is performing, than you are a brat. Why can you complain about Yankees players and be fine but damnit, I mention I think Ricketts sucks as an owner and I'm a brat akin to an 8 year old? Seems like double standards, no?

Again; if you find the ownership of Tom Ricketts good, well thats on you. But also realize that this doesn't have to be how it is. You're giving the owners the power to continue to consolidate the profits, and to cut spending at will. We should demand more of them, not give them carte blanche as you are seemingly doing. You're defending bad behavior and getting all pissy, insulting people via the internet to do so. You're the reason why owners across baseball are capable of hiding behind self imposed tax limits. Good job.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

[CP_414]

As to my use of Willy Wonka, there's been (at least) two versions of it, those being with Gene Wilder and another with Johnny Depp. Both have been on tv this month and my wife has watched both. I'm not sure which version my quote was from, but I do know I saw/heard it; about 5 minutes of listening to the brat was all I could take. Same with you.(Not that you are a brat, but you are a whiner. I shall therefore choose to ignore your further posts. (I'm 74 and a Cubs fan since 1952.) I choose to no longer listen to whiners any more.)

You have no problem “whining” about the performance of a player or coach, but being critical of ownership is not appropriate? Shocking.

[chibears55]

None of what I said was based on 2020. I also don’t share your uncertainty about the direction this is heading in 21 and 22 and maybe beyond.

The last 10 years of Tribune payrolls was pretty comparable to the 1st 10 years of Ricketts payrolls relative to the rest of the league. Relative to a percentage of revenues the last 10 years of Tribune payrolls were considerably higher than the 1st 10 years of Ricketts payrolls.

In terms of player spending, the Ricketts are a lot closer to the Tribune years than you think.

First 5 yrs of Rickett was basically spent tearing it all down to rebuild it, so the payroll was going to be low, and the last 5 years the bulk of the team were already under contract or young Arb players so payroll was kinda stuck to a point..

yes, I wish he would of let Theo spend more on relievers and bench players the last 2 years but it didn't happen, outside of extending Kimbrel and adding Castellanos in 2019.

It not like he put a total choke hold on Theo over the last 5 years, Theo spent on Chatwood, Lackey, Hamels, Heyward, Darvish, Davis, Kimbrel, Jay, Castellanos for half a year to add to the core group of players

So, unless Theo made some moves sooner with the core group, there really wasn't much open outside the bench and bullpen to add significant to payroll.

I mean, I get being upset if it more about possibly losing core guys like Bryant Baez Contreras and not extending them but other then that , I think Theo had some freedom to spend and did to a point..
He just didn't spend much on the whole bullpen or the bench

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[CP_414]

First 5 yrs of Rickett was basically spent tearing it all down to rebuild it, so the payroll was going to be low, and the last 5 years the bulk of the team were already under contract or young Arb players so payroll was kinda stuck to a point..

yes, I wish he would of let Theo spend more on relievers and bench players the last 2 years but it didn't happen, outside of extending Kimbrel and adding Castellanos in 2019.

It not like he put a total choke hold on Theo over the last 5 years, Theo spent on Chatwood, Lackey, Hamels, Heyward, Darvish, Davis, Kimbrel, Jay, Castellanos for half a year to add to the core group of players

So, unless Theo made some moves sooner with the core group, there really wasn't much open outside the bench and bullpen to add significant to payroll.

I mean, I get being upset if it more about possibly losing core guys like Bryant Baez Contreras and not extending them but other then that , I think Theo had some freedom to spend and did to a point..
He just didn't spend much on the whole bullpen or the bench

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

If you think that tanking wasn’t intentional to cut spending, I disagree with you. He’s fortunate that Theo was available and built such a great team but Ricketts has been open that he was going to tank payrolls regardless. He said the tribune payrolls were “unsustainable.”

In the last 6 years where they were competitive they had a top 5 payroll only 4 of the 6, they went over the tax 3 times, and they never blew everyone away the way other teams do sometimes.

We can blame Theo over how every dollar was spent, but the fact remains that when he tanked payrolls Ricketts said the money would be there when they were good. Then when they were good the money wasn’t really there...at least not to the degree it could have been. They had obvious needs the last few years that went unaddressed because of money. He lied and his overall spending record over 10 years is pretty mediocre, and he’s about to tank spending again.

Consider me unimpressed. Im not going to give him credit for paying Jon Jay or doing the bare minimum to have a top 5 payroll some of the time that they were competitive. As I’ve said I think he’s no worse than most Mlb owners but also no better than most.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vince70]

In terms of their politics, I'm not a fan of the Ricketts. As a fan of the Cubs, I have no real problems with Tom as the owner in the last three years that have ended well short of team exceptations. Haven't we been at the very top in team payroll in MLB with little to nothing to show for it in 18-20?

When we needed to rebuild the rotation and fill the holes at closer, he signed off on five deals to acquire Quintana, Chatwood, Darvish, Morrow, and Kimbrel. When it comes to either prospects and money, all were costly significant moves for the Cubs to remain near the top of the NL. Four of these were a epic failure to say the least. Can't blame Ricketts for putting a tighter grip on the checkbook after Theo's recent spending spree hasn't worked. While it's true that Heyward has been more decent than a disaster in the second half of his Cubs career, that is another terrible lengthy contract that Ricketts signed off on at the request of Theo. To say that Ricketts wasn't committed to keeping us as a perennial contender, isn't true back when it looked like we were only a player or two away from getting back to 15-17 results. When Theo saw the dire need for a pure contact type of hitter to help out this wildly inconsistent lineup of swing and miss, Ricketts gave him the green light in back to back seasons to acquire Murphy and Castellanos. All of the above is the opposite of inaction like he was penny pitching by not trying to win another ring. But again the key point here is that we are no longer a few moves away from getting back to the NLCS or WS.

It's more of a question to rebuild or not at this stage for him as the owner. But putting more money in to win with this same underachieving team is probably not the best answer in solving our problems. After watching this core flame out hard for the third consecutive Sept and Oct, it's obvious that big changes must be made in the reshaping of this badly flawed offense of boom or bust. As far as not signing Bryant to a long term extension, that isn't looking like some big missed opportunity at the moment, and let's keep in mind that Boras almost always takes his top clients into free agency anyway. If this was still the 15-17 version of Bryant in terms of offense and health, it might not look so bleak right now on both sides coming together. With the trade value low enough due to very bad performance this year and cause the majority of our hitters will be free agents next year, it's gonna be next to impossible to find much in the way of equal value so it's a tough spot for Ricketts and Hoyer. And it's not like Theo is leaving us with much in the cupboard in terms of pitching on the farm to fill the holes in the rotation and bullpen. It's a mess of a situation right now to clean up, which won't be fixed by throwing money around.

[thawv]

Why is it not a grown up position to dislike this ownership group? It’s a perfectly legitimate position. What impresses you about the ownership group?

I’ll give them credit for hiring Theo. I’ll give them credit for not getting involved in baseball decisions like some owners do. Beyond hiring Theo what impresses you about this ownership group? Maybe you just like their politics? Even with the Theo thing they just got lucky as hell that the Red Sox collapsed in 2011 and he was ready to move on.

The Cubs have had a top 5 payroll 4 times in the last 10 years and are looking to slash spending again. They put a lot of money into investments that will drive revenues to themselves but in terms of what we should care about as fans they’ve been an entirely mediocre ownership group. I’m sure Hotel Zachary is nice. Marquee is garbage. They bought up a ton of property.

Since Steinbrenner died there hasn’t been a good owner in MLB. The Ricketts are far from the worst of the worst, but they are no better than most.

All of this!

I've been saying for years that profits ALWAYS come before winning. GS is the only owner I've ever seen that put winning before anything. For every other owner, money far outweighs winning. This situation is no different.

Ricketts doesn't care about the fans until they stop coming. Until then, **** em. He is a typical owner/businessman.

I really started to notice it when The Trib owned the Cubs. Since this has been my belief since I can remember, I've never been disappointed in ownership. I've never expected anything but pocket lining.

[thawv]

I had mentioned that when the fans stop coming TR will start spending. Honestly, from a business standpoint, why would he sink money in to a product that's already selling? Until his profits are affected, he's not going to spend money. The attendance number where he will spend money could be below 33k. But when there's still 38k - 39k per game, he's not spending. Here's attendance since he's purchased. How can an owner not make a killing owning this team and the field? Now he owns the network and the neighborhood!

2009 39.6k 141m payroll
2010 37.8k (drop) 142m payroll
2011 37.3k (drop) 141m payroll
2012 35.6k (drop again) 108m payroll
2013 32.6 (another big drop) 101m payroll
2014 32.7 (sense of urgency has set in) 93m payroll
2015 36.5 133m payroll
2016 39.9 182m payroll
2017 39.5 186m payroll
2018 38.8 199m payroll
2019 38.2 220m payroll

He has to be freaking out. Not counting 2020, the previous 4 years payroll has climbed, while attendance has declined. Not dramatically, but nonetheless, he doesn't like it.

As of today, from a business standpoint, it doesn't make sense to spend money on the team. He doesn't care how we the fans feel about the situation. We are nothing in his decision making until we stop going to the games. The money is going to continue to go in his pocket until the pocket gets a little lighter. As soon as fans like us realize that winning is not the objective, and making money is, the easier it will be to except what's happening.

I've never expected ownership to spend when they should, because I know what their objective is. It's nice when it happens, but my expectations are zero when it comes to them spending their own money.

Even with the attendance drop 2012-2014 he made a killing!

[CP_414]

Haven't we been at the very top in team payroll in MLB with little to nothing to show for it in 18-20?

No.

[CP_414]

I had mentioned that when the fans stop coming TR will start spending. Honestly, from a business standpoint, why would he sink money in to a product that's already selling? Until his profits are affected, he's not going to spend money. The attendance number where he will spend money could be below 33k. But when there's still 38k - 39k per game, he's not spending. Here's attendance since he's purchased. How can an owner not make a killing owning this team and the field? Now he owns the network and the neighborhood!

2009 39.6k 141m payroll
2010 37.8k (drop) 142m payroll
2011 37.3k (drop) 141m payroll
2012 35.6k (drop again) 108m payroll
2013 32.6 (another big drop) 101m payroll
2014 32.7 (sense of urgency has set in) 93m payroll
2015 36.5 133m payroll
2016 39.9 182m payroll
2017 39.5 186m payroll
2018 38.8 199m payroll
2019 38.2 220m payroll

He has to be freaking out. Not counting 2020, the previous 4 years payroll has climbed, while attendance has declined. Not dramatically, but nonetheless, he doesn't like it.

As of today, from a business standpoint, it doesn't make sense to spend money on the team. He doesn't care how we the fans feel about the situation. We are nothing in his decision making until we stop going to the games. The money is going to continue to go in his pocket until the pocket gets a little lighter. As soon as fans like us realize that winning is not the objective, and making money is, the easier it will be to except what's happening.

I've never expected ownership to spend when they should, because I know what their objective is. It's nice when it happens, but my expectations are zero when it comes to them spending their own money.

Even with the attendance drop 2012-2014 he made a killing!

Except for the period when he tanked those attendance numbers are very flat, but revenues have exploded during this time. With all the new revenue streams a few hundred thousand in attendance isn’t a huge deal. They’ve gotten better at maximizing the cost per fan anyway.

TV ratings will be more important than attendance as an incentive to spend moving forward.